1. U.S. Department of State
Final Plan for Retrospective Analysis
of Existing Rules
August 17, 2011

2. 2
U.S. Department of State
Final Plan for Retrospective Analysis of Existing Rules
August 17, 2011
I. Executive Summary of Final Plan and Compliance with Executive Order 13563
Executive Order 13563 recognizes the importance of maintaining a consistent culture
of retrospective review and analysis throughout the executive branch. Before a rule is
tested, it is difficult to be certain of its consequences, including its costs and benefits.
The Department of State’s plan is designed to create a defined mechanism for
identifying certain significant rules that are obsolete, unnecessary, unjustified,
excessively burdensome, or counterproductive. Its review processes are also intended
to facilitate the strengthening, complementing, or modernizing rules where necessary
or appropriate.
This plan offers a large number of reform initiatives, promising significant economic
benefits and savings. Among the most important potential reforms are initiatives that
would promote exports by streamlining and simplifying existing requirements, and
increase tourism by streamlining and simplifying visa processing requirements,
consistent with Federal law and the Department’s national security role.
Executive Order 13563 calls not for a single exercise, but for “periodic review of
existing significant regulations,” with close reference to empirical evidence. It
explicitly states that “retrospective analyses, including supporting data, should be
released online wherever possible.” Consistent with the commitment to periodic
review and public participation, the Department of State will continue to assess its
existing significant regulations in accordance with the requirements of Executive
Order 13563.
To that end, the Department of State believes that the public must have a meaningful
opportunity to comment on the rules as we are reviewing them. Each of our
rulemaking bureaus (primarily, the Bureaus of Consular Affairs, Educational and
Cultural Affairs, Political-Military Affairs, and Administration) will provide notice to
the public as it begins its review. The public will have the opportunity to provide
comments on those rules within sixty days of that notice.
The Department of State welcomes public suggestions about reforms. If, at any time,
members of the public identify possible reforms to streamline requirements and to
reduce existing burdens, the Department will give those suggestions careful
consideration.

3. 3
II. Scope of Plan
a. There are no sub-agencies within the Department of State for including in
this plan.
b. Check all the types of documents covered under this plan:
_ X__Existing regulations
X__Significant guidance documents
__X__Existing information collections
__X__ Unfinished proposed rules
____ Other (Specify________)
III. Public Access and Participation
a. The Department of State is responsible for carrying out the nation’s foreign
policy, representing the United States, promoting U.S. business, protecting
American citizens, ensuring U.S. border security, telling America’s story to the
world, and providing the platform from which all U.S. government agencies
operate abroad. It is essential that we take every opportunity to engage the public
as we do this vital work on its behalf, and that consistent with existing authorities
and Executive Order 13563, we undertake reforms to simplify and streamline
existing requirements when consistent with Federal law, with close attention to
the views of the public and affected stakeholders.
Our era is one in which news from around the world is accessible to everyone on
a moment-by-moment basis. Reflecting this new era, the Department has
invested heavily in the use of social media, such as Facebook®, Twitter®, blogs,
and wikis for internal collaboration and external engagement. We continually
must engage the public in our work, which is why the Department’s website
presents up-to-date information on the issues of the day in foreign affairs and
development assistance. Our Open Government website
(http://www.state.gov/open) provides a central location where one can follow the
Department’s efforts on key initiatives including the release of datasets at
www.data.gov. This plan, along with links to various government and other sites,
is hosted at http://www.state.gov.
The Department of State published a second notice in the Federal Register on
May 9, 2011 seeking public comment on our Preliminary Plan. The notice is
located at http://www.state.gov, in the “About State” tab, Rules and Information
Collection link.
b. Brief summary of public comments to notice seeking input:
The Department of State received comments from the public in response to our
Federal Register notices from the American Immigration Lawyers Association
(AILA), the Institute for Policy Integrity at New York University School of Law,

4. 4
BAE Systems, the International Association of Professional Numismatists, JMC
(Japan Machinery Center for Trade and Investment), and several private citizens.
One comment pertained to Medicare regulations regarding anesthesia services
which are unrelated to the Department’s mission.
· The AILA comments are described in Section V. c. of this plan.
· The Institute for Policy Integrity submitted a letter regarding how agencies
should draft their plans. The Institute’s letter contains comprehensive
suggestions for all agencies, not just the State Department, and can be
found at regulations.gov at the following link:
http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=DOS-2011-0079-0017.
The Department appreciates the work that went into these suggestions, and
will study them carefully and implement those that we believe will
improve our processes.
· BAE Systems supports the objectives of the Bureau of Political-Military
Affairs, Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC), in the Export
Control Reform initiative. Specifically, the comment relates to the
proposed establishment of a general program license (Ref. item number
15, Tab B of the Appendix of this plan). Since this is a proposed rule not
yet developed, a response at this juncture would be premature. However,
the Department of State will carefully consider comments pertaining to
specific rules as those rules are published in the Federal Register.
· The International Association of Professional Numismatists submitted
comments regarding specific rules implemented by the Department of the
Treasury. The rules were explained at 72 FR 38470, 74 FR 2838, and 76
FR 3012. The Department cannot address these comments at this time,
since this matter is the subject of ongoing litigation against the
Department of State.
· The JMC (Japan Machinery Center for Trade and Investment) commented
on 22 C.F.R. 41.111, requesting that the Department consider reinstating
the practice of revalidating employer-sponsored visas within the United
States as a means of reducing the travel and expense burden on visa
holders who must leave the United States to revalidate their visas.
Through the course of retrospective review, rule writers and subject matter
experts will consider the different interests and factors, including those
relating to national security, which may be impacted by the regulation.
While the Department appreciates the request, the initial security concerns
that led to the termination of domestic revalidations in 2004 remain valid.
Given these concerns, the Department has no plans in the immediate
future to resume domestic revalidation.

5. 5
· The comment on passports and citizenship raised issues entirely unrelated
to the Department’s preliminary plan; thus, there is no basis for a
Department response to the comment.
· One individual asked about the manner in which the Department would
stagger its periodic reviews and requests for public input to allow for
meaningful and thoughtful comments. The Department of State agrees that
the public must have a meaningful opportunity to comment on the rules as
we are reviewing them. Each of our rulemaking bureaus (primarily, the
Bureaus of Consular Affairs, Educational and Cultural Affairs, Political-
Military Affairs, and Administration) will provide notice to the public as it
begins its review. The public will have the opportunity to provide
comments on those rules within sixty days of that notice.
· The Department received a request to provide a minimum of 90 days for
the public to comment during the periodic review. The Department notes
that Executive Order 13563 calls for a minimum comment period of 60
days for proposed rules. In a manner both consistent with the APA and in
the spirit of transparency set out by the Executive Order, the Department
will solicit public comments when appropriate and when feasible. The
Department established an e-mail box on state.gov for interested parties to
submit comments on additional regulations for ongoing review.
· One commenter inquired about the 17 day comment period for responses
to the Department’s request for comment, published March 15, 2011.
Once the Department has submitted its final plan to implement the
Executive Order, it will be published in the Federal Register along with
the opportunity for public participation and comments. In the full spirit of
the Executive Order, the Department also established an e-mail box,
ereg@state.gov, for interested parties to submit comments on additional
regulations for future review.
· Several comments identified and recommended specific regulations to be
modified, streamlined, expanded, or repealed. While outside the scope of
the present response by the Department, these concerns will be addressed
and carefully considered during the process of retrospective review.
Executive Order 13563 calls not for a single exercise, but for periodic
review. Subject matter experts and rule writers will review these
regulations and all other Department regulations throughout the course of
the retrospective review, as prescribed by the Executive Order and
scheduled in the Department’s plan. The review will be conducted in the
course of meeting the requirements of the Executive Order, assessing each
regulation on a variety of factors including, but not limited to, the impact
and benefit to the public, national security interests, economic

6. 6
considerations, potential cost, burden reduction to both the public and the
Federal government, changes in technology, and available alternatives. As
rule writers progress through the retrospective review schedule, they will
evaluate each existing regulation in light of all equities to ensure that the
Department’s regulatory scheme is appropriately updated to strike a
balance among these factors and the current circumstances.
IV. Current Agency Efforts Already Underway Independent of E.O. 13563
a. Summary of pre-existing agency efforts (independent of E.O. 13563) already
underway to conduct retrospective analysis of existing rules:
The Department has been committed to the retrospective analysis of existing rules.
The Department is responsible for implementing the President’s foreign policy, and
that responsibility calls for continuing scrutiny of existing practices.
The Department recognizes that a key part of its mission is to engage the American
public on the nation’s foreign policy. The explosive growth in the Internet and social
media tools has enabled greater citizen participation than was previously possible. As
a result, the Department receives ongoing feedback on our regulations, Foreign
Affairs Manual, public notices and information collections from the public at-large,
DHS and other government agencies and other interested stakeholders. Our
Exchange Visitor Program holds public meetings with private sector, academic and
governmental program sponsors for providing oversight and compliance feedback.
b. What specific rules, if any, were already under consideration for retrospective
analysis?
See the latest publication of the Department’s submission to the Unified Agenda of
Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions in www.reginfo.gov. The Bureau of
Consular Affairs, for example, was already in the process of reviewing Part 71 of 22
CFR, Consular Protection Loans. In addition, see Section V. c. below, for rules in the
Bureau of Political-Military Affairs that were already under consideration for
retrospective analysis. Revisions to the U.S. Munitions List were already in progress.
V. Elements of Final Plan/Compliance with E.O. 13563
a. How does the agency plan to develop a strong, ongoing culture of retrospective
analysis?
The Department’s leadership, beginning with Secretary Clinton, is looking forward to
the opportunities presented in the E.O. initiative. We recognize the importance of
streamlining existing requirements and of reducing unjustified burdens. Recent and
coming reforms, designed to streamline the export control process within the

7. 7
constraints of Federal law, are a clear example. We also recognize the importance,
for this and other endeavors, of collaboration, engagement, partnerships, and
accountability. The principal focus of this plan is to build on the work currently
underway and expand our engagement with all of our stakeholders. We have created
a Rules and Information Collection website, linked to the Department’s home page.
The website provides access to available information and represents an effort to
engage the public more dynamically, solicit input, and increase collaboration for an
on-going retrospective analysis. The URL for the site is:
http://www.state.gov/m/a/dir/rulemaking/index.htm.
State’s mission also includes making relevant information available to the public.
The Bureau of Consular Affairs provides detailed travel information about countries
and documentation of U.S. citizens and foreign nationals via the Internet on
www.travel.state.gov. The first quantitative assessment of online open government
efforts recently found this site to be one of the highest ranking in online transparency.
State.gov also scored high in this transparency project, which surveyed more than
36,000 citizens who visited 14 federal sites during the fourth quarter of 2009.
Through our website, we will encourage the public to review and provide us with
their comments on the best way to conduct our analysis on an ongoing basis. We will
also actively seek views from the public on specific rules or Department-imposed
obligations that might be modified or repealed. To promote a culture of retrospective
evaluation, an executive committee was created within the Department with
responsibility for developing preliminary and final plans and for subsequent periodic
reviews. All offices responsible for writing rules were requested to nominate a
representative who will be an active and responsible regulatory review member.
Although our regulatory procedures are dynamic and have constant triggers that
promote review and amendment to our rules and other guidance, we will conduct
annual reviews, with the first one commencing on the anniversary after the
completion of the initial review. In addition, each proposed rule and final rule will be
reviewed for meeting the requirements of the E.O.
The Department’s goal is to create a systematic method for identifying those
significant rules that are obsolete or no longer make sense. While this review will
focus on the elimination of rules that are no longer warranted, the Department will
also consider strengthening, complementing, or modernizing rules where necessary or
appropriate including, as relevant, undertaking new rulemaking. For this purpose, the
Department has developed a checklist to not only serve as a guide to rule writers, but
also to serve as an official record of the systematic review of each significant rule.
Furthermore, the Department will also consider how regulations might be designed
and written in ways that facilitate evaluation of their consequences and thus promote
retrospective analyses and the measurement of actual results. When appropriate, the
Department will use pilot programs that will allow us to better measure the impact of
a proposed rule, before formally implementing it.

8. 8
b. Prioritization. What factors and processes will the agency use in setting
priorities?
The Department of State is the agency with lead responsibility for formulating and
carrying out the nation’s foreign policy. The Department operates in Washington,
D.C., and in nearly 200 countries, with over 285 locations world-wide. State’s major
program areas include diplomacy, border security, U.S. citizen’s services, and foreign
assistance. The Department’s Mission Statement is to Advance freedom for the
benefit of the American people and the international community by helping to build
and sustain a more democratic, secure, and prosperous world composed of well-
governed states that respond to the needs of their people, reduce widespread poverty,
and act responsibly within the international system. The Department, being the
diplomatic arm of the U.S. government, generates many narrative documents, treaties,
and inter-governmental agreements.
The fundamental activities of diplomacy are based on human contact and the
establishment of common dialogue to both further ties, as well as resolve conflict in a
peaceful manner between nations. This function is not the subject of rulemaking; for
this reason, the Department does not publish many rules on a year-to-year basis.
When the Department develops rulemakings, it acts consistent with the requirements
of Executive Order 13563. The Department’s rules are reviewed on a continuing
basis consistent with the principles established in the E.O. The Department will not
impose a mandatory schedule for review on the organizations responsible for
promulgating rules. Instead, bureaus will establish their own priorities and
guidelines, giving priority to significant regulations affected by: comments from the
public; other agencies’ and internal feedback; changes in legislation; and, where
applicable, to simplify language based on the provisions of the Plain Writing Act of
2010 (Public Law 111-274).
c. Initial list of candidate rules for review over the next two years:
Some of the rules listed in this section were identified during a public comment
period, and/or the responsible bureau had identified them for review prior to the
development of this plan. Detailed plans for the major rulemaking bureaus may be
found in the Appendix section.
· Bureau of Political-Military Affairs
A complete list of regulatory changes that the Bureau of Political-Military Affairs can
immediately foresee may be found at Tab B of the Appendix. The list should not be
construed as a limitation on the bureau’s ability to propose and staff additional
changes based upon statutory changes, geo-political developments, new departmental
requirements/priorities, or other unforeseen events.

9. 9
The overall effect of the rule reviews will be to promote exports by simplifying the
regulatory structure for exporters of defense articles and services. Most importantly,
this would be effected by clarifying what is covered by the United States Munitions
List (USML). At the moment, almost all USML categories are being reviewed, with
the goal of revising them into a “positive” list that describes controlled items using
objective criteria, rather than broad, open-ended, subjective, or design intent-based
criteria frequently found on the current USML.
Certain licensing exemptions will reduce the burden for exporters by eliminating the
requirement of submitting an export license application. Other changes that will
reduce the burden to the public include the electronic payment of registration fees,
and, for those licenses decremented electronically through the Automated Export
System, the discontinuation of the requirement to send in expired or exhausted
licenses.
· Bureau of Resource Management
Repeal Part 8 of 22 CFR, Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) Regulation for
the Department of State.
Part 8 is 35 years old and out of date. In the years since it was initially published, the
General Services Administration (GSA) published its FACA regulation in 41 CFR
Part 102-3. There is no reason for the Department to have a separate regulation in the
CFR. The Department will repeal its regulation and publish a Foreign Affairs Manual
provision that identifies which offices have responsibility for certain FACA
functions, and any internal procedures to be used in managing advisory committees.
· Bureau of Consular Affairs
The Bureau of Consular Affairs (CA) will review one fourth of their regulations each
quarter to comply with the annual retrospective review requirement of E.O. 13563.
CA will ensure sufficient independence from those responsible for writing and
implementing regulations through a review and approval process that includes top
level managers and others who are not rule writers. These will include: the Assistant
Secretary for Consular Affairs, Principal and Deputy Assistant Secretaries (all of
whom are career officers with extensive field experience), attorneys, subject matter
experts, consular officers abroad, passport specialists, and the Department’s internal
and interagency process. The full report, including cost savings and burden
reduction, may be found at Tab B of the Appendix.
Revisions of CA’s rules will promote significant goals for the public. The Visa
Office’s retrospective analysis will review each regulation in order to: ensure an
efficient visa regulatory scheme free of administrative burdens or obsolete visa
requirements; identify processing steps that can be streamlined; and eliminate any
restrictions that contribute to confusion or excessive costs to the public and the
Department. The Department recognizes that a visa process that is simplified and

10. 10
streamlined, while remaining consistent with Federal law and the Department’s
national security role, would have the effect of encouraging individuals overseas to
apply for visas and travel to the United States; such legitimate travel could promote
tourism, growth and job creation.
When the review results in a revision to a regulation, the revisions will take into
consideration all available alternatives of visa processing regulations and reflect the
approach that maximizes net benefits, including national security and potential
economic, environmental, public health and safety, and other advantages; distributive
impacts; and equity.
The Overseas Citizens Services Office’s (OCS) retrospective analysis will review
each regulation in order to increase simplicity and clarity, eliminate outdated
information and obsolete rules, update technological references, and focus on
maximizing OCS’s and U.S. embassies’ and consulates’ ability to provide consular
services to U.S. citizens abroad in a timely, cost efficient and effective manner.
Passport Services’ retrospective analysis will ensure continuous consideration and
improvement in areas such as border security, integrity of travel and citizenship
documents, efficiency in the passport issuance process, and customer service. These
revisions will have multiple positive impacts, including strengthening law
enforcement and supporting border security by ensuring the integrity of U.S. travel
and citizenship documents, thus leading to greater efficiencies within Passport
Services and simplifying the rules that apply to the public.
Consular Affairs performs an annual examination of costs, time allocations, and
volumes associated with all consular services. The activity-based cost model is used
to determine which consular fees are set at a level higher or lower than the updated
true cost, thereby increasing the efficiency of the Department of State by adjusting
consular fees only on an as-needed basis at a level that recovers costs. Moreover, the
notice-and-comment process provides customers a more transparent view of the work
and costs involved in providing consular services and the associated fees.
Consular Affairs works very closely with the Department of Homeland Security’s
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (DHS/USCIS) on overlapping regulations
and will reach out to counterparts regarding the retrospective analysis process as
appropriate.
Certain provisions will be reviewed pursuant to a request from the American
Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA). The Department will carefully consider
AILA’s comments, which are included here:
o Part 41 of 22 CFR: Section 111(b), Issuance of Nonimmigrant Visas
in the United States
“As of July 16, 2004, DOS ceased visa reissuance (visa
revalidation) for the C, E, H, I, L, O, and P nonimmigrant visa

11. 11
(NIV) categories due to the requirement of biometrics capture for
these categories as a result of the Enhanced Border Security and
Visa Entry Reform Act (Pub. L. No. 107-173). See 69 Fed. Reg.
35121 (June 23, 2004). Visa revalidation greatly enhanced and
facilitated international business travel and should be reinstated for
the above-referenced visa categories. Biometrics for visa
revalidations could be captured by USCIS Application Support
Centers.”
o Part 41 of 22 CFR: Section 111(d), Automatic Extension of Validity
at Ports of Entry
“This provision permits a nonimmigrant with an unexpired I-94
Arrival/Departure Record, who is returning to the United States
from a contiguous territory after an absence of not more than 30
days, to be readmitted notwithstanding the fact that the underlying
nonimmigrant visa has expired, unless the individual has applied
for (and presumably been denied) a nonimmigrant visa while
abroad. This provision should be amended to permit such
individuals to reenter the United States for the period of admission
remaining on his or her I-94 card.”
o Part 41 of 22 CFR: Section 81, Fiancé(e) or Spouse of a U.S. Citizen
and Derivative Children
“DOS announced that effective February 1, 2010, it would no
longer allow a K-3 applicant to choose whether to proceed with K-
3 processing at an NIV consulate or the I-130/immigrant visa (IV)
processing at an IV consulate where the National Visa Center
(NVC) has received approval notices for both the K-3 and the I-
130 petitions. Given the difference in processing times for K-3
NIVs versus IVs at certain consular posts, and the resulting delay
in family reunification caused by this recent change, this regulation
should be amended to permit the applicant to choose between
proceeding with the K-3 or IV application under these
circumstances.”
o Part 41 of 22 CFR: Section 103(b)(3), Filing an Electronic NIV
Application—Electronic Signature
“On April 29, 2008, DOS amended the regulations relating to NIV
applications to offer an electronic application procedure on Form
DS-160. See 73 Fed. Reg. 23067. The supplementary information
to the final rule states that while a third party may assist the
applicant in preparing the DS-160, the applicant must
electronically sign the application him- or herself. This requires the
applicant to physically click the “submit” button and does not
permit an authorized attorney or representative to do so on the
applicant’s behalf. This is extremely burdensome for applicants

12. 12
who may not have a computer, access to a computer, or cannot
sufficiently complete the electronic form. This provision should be
amended to permit a third party to sign the electronic DS-160 with
the express consent of the applicant.”
o Part 41 of 22 CFR: Section 105(a), NIV Supporting Documents, and
§41.121(b): Refusal Procedure
“22 CFR §41.105(a) states that “[a]ll documents and other
evidence presented by the alien, including briefs submitted by
attorneys and other representatives, shall be considered by the
consular officer.” Though 22 CFR §41.121(b) requires a consular
officer to “inform the alien of the ground(s) of ineligibility” when
a visa is refused, the information provided in the denial letter is
often of a very general nature. The regulations should be amended
to require consular officers to provide a detailed statement of
ineligibility to demonstrate that all submitted documents were
reviewed and considered in accordance with §41.105(a).”
o Part 42 of 22 CFR: Section 65, IV Supporting Documents
“Immigrant visa applicants are required to submit originals of
essential documents such as birth certificates, marriage certificates,
and police certificates to the NVC. The physical case file,
including the original documents, is forwarded to the consulate,
but documents can get lost in the file transfer process. This practice
should be amended to permit IV applicants to submit good, clear
copies of original documents to the NVC and to permit the
applicant to bring original documents to the interview for
inspection by the consular officer.”
o Part 42 of 22 CFR: Section 21(b), Immigrant Visas for Surviving
Beneficiaries/Spouses of Deceased U.S. Citizens
“USCIS regulations promulgated in 2006, 8 CFR §204.2(i)(1)(iv),
allow for the automatic conversion of an I-130 petition to an I-360
petition upon the petitioner’s death in the case of a spouse (widow)
of a U.S. citizen. Section 568(c) of the FY2010 Appropriations
Act, Pub. L. No. 111-83, included provisions permitting widows
married less than two years to similarly self-petition, as well as
provisions for benefits for other surviving relatives. Under INA
§204(l), such individuals are eligible for survivor benefits if they
can show a U.S. residence at the time of the petitioner’s death,
even where they have proceeded abroad for the sole purpose of
consular processing. However, it appears that DOS has yet to issue
guidance or regulations on the treatment of surviving beneficiaries,
and may in fact be treating widow petitions as automatically
revoked under 8 CFR §205.1(a)(3), in cases where the petitioner
dies before the beneficiary has immigrated to the United States.

13. 13
We ask that regulations and/or guidance be implemented in this
regard.”
o A proposal for the right to counsel at U.S. embassies and consulates.
The comments from AILA are located at
http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=DOS-2011-0047-0004.
· Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs
The Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs (ECA) fosters mutual
understanding between the people of the United States and the people of other
countries to promote friendly and peaceful relations, as mandated by the Mutual
Educational and Cultural Exchange Act of 1961.
The Exchange Visitor Program (Title 22, Part 62) governs 15 different categories
of exchange, each with its own regulations. The regulations are regularly
reviewed and updated for each of the categories. The general public is actively
involved in all rulemakings, including public meetings and requests for
comments. ECA’s report may be found at Tab C of the Appendix.
d. Structure and Staffing. High-level agency official responsible for
retrospective review.
Name/Position Title: Patrick F. Kennedy, Under Secretary for Management
Email address: RegulatoryReview@state.gov
e. How does the agency plan to ensure that agency’s retrospective team and
process maintains sufficient independence from the offices responsible for
writing and implementing regulations?
The Department recognizes the importance of independence from the offices
responsible for writing and implementing regulations. The Under Secretary for
Management is the lead Department of State official for overall operational
implementation of the Executive Order. The retrospective team answers to that
official, not to the rule writers. With respect to prospective rules, proposed drafts
of such rules must be cleared by the Office of the Legal Adviser, the Bureau of
Resource Management, and other offices relevant to the regulation’s subject
matter, which are typically independent of the rule writers. For example, rules
affecting consular affairs require clearance by the Assistant Secretary for
Consular Affairs and several Deputy Assistant Secretaries all of whom are career
field officers, while various additional circumstances may require clearance by
the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) and the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB). These required clearance steps ensure objective channels of
review for rule drafts.

14. 14
It is possible, but very unlikely, that third parties will perform the analyses.
f. Describe agency actions, if any, to strengthen internal review expertise. This
could include training staff, regrouping staff, hiring new staff, or other
methods.
A working group was created to enforce the Department’s efforts for making the
most up-to-date information available online for the public and Department staff,
for discussing information about the requirements of the E.O. and for planning the
initial and on-going annual reviews. Looking forward, the Department’s bureaus
will participate in the rule writing process by contributing staff to the
retrospective team. This approach will provide a rich retrospective review
exchange with the public and will ensure that all aspects of the Department’s
broad expertise are reflected in the E.O.’s retrospective analysis of existing rules
efforts. The Department will coordinate periodic training for its retrospective
team participants to ensure familiarity with the Federal Docket Management
System and to ensure consistency throughout the lookback process.
g. How will the agency plan for retrospective analysis over the next two years,
and beyond?
This plan has been developed collaboratively under the direction of the Under
Secretary of Management. The team is composed of bureau representatives
currently active in the rule writing and rule review process. Because the
Department regulatory procedures are dynamic in nature, there are triggers that
promote our on-going review and amendment to our rules and other guidance.
The Department uses the semi-annual Unified Agenda of Regulatory and
Deregulatory Actions (the Agenda) as another way to review existing regulations.
The Department’s portion of the Agenda describes the regulatory actions that
State has recently completed or expects to promulgate in the next year.
As rules are reviewed, Department regulatory offices determine which agencies
will be involved based on existing practices for inter-agency review of proposed
or revised rules.
h. How will the agency decide what to do with analysis?
As described in section V. b. of this plan, rulemaking in the Department of State
is a decentralized function. Department organizations maintain their own
schedule for reviewing regulations. The triggers that promote review and
amendment of rules may generate from a variety of sources. For example, the
Bureau of Administration maintains ongoing, regular reviews of the Department
of State Acquisition Regulation (DOSAR) codified in Chapter 6 of 48 CFR.
Updates to the DOSAR are published at regular intervals in the Federal Register,

15. 15
as necessary, and are subject to public comment. Typically, DOSAR changes are
generated by requirements from the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR).
Another example is the Bureau of Consular Affairs (CA), which receives ongoing
feedback on its regulations, public notices and information collection from
sources such as the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA),
adoption service providers, adoption accrediting entities, other public and private
lawyers, the public at large, the Department of Homeland Security, other
government agencies, the court system through litigation, consular officials in the
field and other stakeholders. Certain CA regulations, such as the adoption
regulations (Parts 96, 97, 98 and 99 of 22 CFR) and Western Hemisphere Travel
Initiative Regulations (22 CFR Part 53) included not only the required public
comment periods, but extensive public hearings and briefings. When CA receives
feedback, it reviews the guidance and determines whether or not changes are
necessary. Furthermore, CA conducts annual reviews of pertinent Foreign Affairs
Manual regulations which can result in revisions to the Code of Federal
Regulations.
i. What are the agency’s plans for revising rules? How will agencies
periodically revisit rules (e.g., though sunset provisions, during regular
intervals)?
The Department will review each rule and determine whether or not it should be
revised.
j. Describe how the agency will coordinate with other federal agencies that
have jurisdiction or similar interests:
As administrators of the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) and
rules dealing with passport/visa issues, the Department already coordinates with
other Federal agencies when it promulgates rules, and will do the same if the
retrospective analysis reveals existing rules that must be changed.
k. Will the plan be peer reviewed?
This plan was developed by a team led by the Department’s Under Secretary for
Management, composed of employees throughout the Department. The public
will be given an opportunity to comment on the plan, but it will not be peer-
reviewed in the scientific sense.

16. 16
VI. Components of Retrospective Cost-Benefit Analysis
During the initial review process, the Department will assess the potential costs
and benefits of its regulatory actions according to OMB Circular A-4, Regulatory
Analysis, and best practices. In addition, the Department generally implements
and reviews rules based on statutory requirements, recouping the cost of service,
and increase in net benefits.
A working group, consisting of Department individuals with expertise in rule
writing, will ensure an effective retrospective analysis by taking into
consideration the effectiveness of the regulatory scheme and its costs and benefits
on the regulated parties. In general, due to the nature of the Department’s
regulatory actions, the incorporation of experimental design does not apply.
VII. Publishing the Agency’s Plan Online
The Department will publish this plan on its Open Government website:
http://www.state.gov/m/a/dir/rulemaking/index.htm and
http://www.state.gov/open/.

17. 17
APPENDIX
TAB A – BUREAU OF POLITICAL-MILITARY AFFAIRS
TAB B – BUREAU OF CONSULAR AFFAIRS
TAB C – BUREAU OF EDUCATIONAL AND CULTURAL AFFAIRS

18. 18
TAB A
BUREAU OF POLITICAL-MILITARY AFFAIRS

19. 19
BUREAU OF POLITICAL-MILITARY AFFAIRS
DIRECTORATE OF DEFENSE TRADE CONTROLS (DDTC)
Rulemaking, Regulations Under Review and Burden Reduction
This plan contains a list of regulations being written or reviewed by the Directorate of Defense
Trade Controls (DDTC). Most of these proposed rulemakings are a result of the President’s
Export Control Reform initiative, the object of which is to simplify and clarify the regulations
that govern the export of commodities and technologies. DDTC administers the International
Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR), and therefore is working on the revision of the defense
trade regulations. Other government agencies are working on the regulations they administer.
The overall effects of the revision of these regulations will be to simplify the regulatory structure
for exporters of defense articles and defense services and reduce the number of export licenses
submitted by exporters. Currently, the United States Munitions List (USML) controls all defense
articles equally, regardless of sensitivity. The USML categories are being reviewed, with the
goal of revising them into a “positive” list that describes defense articles using objective criteria,
rather than broad, open-ended, subjective, or design intent-based criteria frequently found on the
current USML. Defense articles that do not require the stringent controls of the Arms Export
Control Act will be moved to the jurisdiction of the Department of Commerce, where the
licensing burden on exports can be dramatically reduced.
Certain licensing exemptions will reduce burden for exporters by eliminating the requirement of
submitting an export license application. Other changes that will reduce burden to the public
include the electronic payment of registration fees and, for those licenses decremented
electronically through the Automated Export System, the discontinuation of the requirement to
return to DDTC expired licenses.
Most rules are in draft stages, with the expectation that all will be published as final rules by
mid- 2012. Where available, citations are provided for those rules that have been published as
proposed or final rules.
This is a list of regulatory changes that DDTC can immediately foresee, but should not be
construed as a limitation on DDTC’s ability to propose and staff additional changes based upon
statutory changes, geo-political developments, new departmental requirements/priorities, or other
unforeseen events.
1) Revision of 22 CFR 121, International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR), United
States Munitions List (USML). Each category listed below will be the subject of a
separate rule (only one proposed rule has been published to date).

20. 20
The object of the revision is to more clearly identify items that are defense articles. In
addition, certain items now covered by the USML are to be moved to the Commerce
Control List, where they may be subject to more flexible licensing policies.
· Category I—Firearms, Close Assault Weapons and Combat Shotguns
· Category II—Guns and Armament
· Category III—Ammunition/Ordnance
· Category IV—Launch Vehicles, Guided Missiles, Ballistic Missiles, Rockets, Torpedoes,
Bombs and Mines
· Category V—Explosives and Energetic Materials, Propellants, Incendiary Agents and
Their Constituents
· Category VI—Vessels of War and Special Naval Equipment.
· Category VII—Tanks and Military Vehicles (Proposed rule published December 10,
2010, 75 FR 76930)
· Category VIII—Aircraft and Associated Equipment
· Category IX—Military Training Equipment and Training
· Category X—Protective Personnel Equipment and Shelters
· Category XI—Military Electronics
· Category XII—Fire Control, Range Finder, Optical and Guidance and Control Equipment
· Category XIII—Auxiliary Military Equipment
· Category XIV—Toxicological Agents, Including Chemical Agents, Biological Agents,
and Associated Equipment
· Category XV—Spacecraft Systems and Associated Equipment
· Category XVI—Nuclear Weapons, Design and Testing Related Items
· Category XVII—Classified Articles, Technical Data and Defense Services Not Otherwise
Enumerated
· Category XVIII—Directed Energy Weapons
· Category XIX – Gas Turbine Engines
· Category XX—Submersible Vessels, Oceanographic and Associated Equipment
Net effects: Regulatory clarification. This will lead to reduction of burden, in many
instances, by eliminating the necessity of an export license from the Department of State.
This reduction in license volume will result in cost savings to the defense industry, as fees
paid by defense manufacturers and exporters to register with the Department of State are
determined in part by the number of licenses submitted. Regulatory clarification also should
lead to burden reduction through the decreased use of the commodity jurisdiction
determination procedure, for a USML that clearly delineates defense articles should lead to
less ambiguity on the part of exporters.
2) New licensing exemption for certain replacement parts and incorporated articles (ITAR
sections 123.28 and 126.19). Net effect: Reduce burden by eliminating the need for the
affected public to submit license applications in certain instances. Proposed rule
published March 15, 2011, 76 FR 13928.

21. 21
3) New licensing policy for transfer of defense articles to dual national and third-country
national employees (ITAR section 126.18). Net effect: Reduce burden by eliminating
the need for the affected public to submit license applications in certain instances.
Proposed rule published August 11, 2010, 75 FR 48625. Final rule published on May 13,
2011, 76 FR 28174.
4) New licensing exemption for the temporary export for personal use of chemical agent
protective gear (ITAR section 123.17). Net effect: Reduce burden by eliminating the
need for the affected public to submit license applications in certain instances. Proposed
rule published March 23, 2011, 76 FR 16353.
5) New electronic submission of registration payments (ITAR parts 120, 122, and 129). Net
effect: Reduce burden through process enhancements. Specifically, revisions to the form
used by the public to register as defense exporters/manufacturers/brokers will cut the
estimated burden time in half. As there are currently approximately 10,000 registrants,
this will amount to a burden reduction of 10,000 hours annually. Proposed rule published
February 24, 2011, 76 FR 10291.
6) Clarification of records maintenance requirement (ITAR section 122.5).
Net effect: Reduce burden by clarifying the regulatory requirement in this instance.
7) Discontinue submissions of form DSP-53 (ITAR section 123.4). Net effect: Regulatory
clarification, as the State Department does not have the authority to regulate the
permanent importation of defense articles. For those foreign governments requiring
documentation of the Federal government’s approval of the temporary importation of
defense articles, which the State Department is authorized to regulate, the State
Department’s DSP-61 or DSP-85 must be used. Proposed rule published July 14, 2011,
76 FR 41438.
8) Change in requirements for the return of licenses (ITAR section 123.22). Net effect:
Reduce burden by eliminating the need for the affected public to return expired license
applications in certain instances. Proposed rule published July 14, 2011, 76 FR 41440.
9) Revision of agreements procedures (ITAR part 124). Net effect: Potential for burden
reduction with the adoption of a form for this information collection.
10) Update information on sanctioned countries (ITAR section 126.1). Net effect:
Regulatory clarification. Accurately describing proscribed destinations in the regulations
will provide information to applicants to preclude them from expending resources pursuing
contracts that will not be approved by the U.S. government.
11) Clarify and reflect new policy for exports made by or for the U.S. government (ITAR
section 126.4). Net effect: Regulatory clarification, which may lead to more frequent use of
this available licensing exemption.
12) Revise brokering regulations (ITAR part 129). Net effect: Regulatory clarification.

22. 22
13) Revise definition of “defense service” (ITAR sections 120.9, 120.38, 124.1, and 124.2).
Net effect: Reduce burden by eliminating the need for the affected public to submit license
applications in certain instances. Proposed rule published April 13, 2011, 76 FR 20590.
14) New regulations implementing the Australia and UK defense cooperation treaties (ITAR
parts 120, 123, 124, 126, 127, and 129). Net effect: Reduce burden by eliminating the need
for the affected public to submit license applications in certain instances.
15) Establishment of a general program license which would allow multiple exporters to
collaborate with foreign partners on U.S. government programs (ITAR part 123).
16) Revise/establish definitions of/for “technology,” “specially designed,” and “public
domain” (ITAR part 120). Net effect: Part of the USML review, and the overall effort to
more clearly distinguish defense items from commercial items in regulations.
17) Revision of Missile Technology Control Regime annex (ITAR part 121). Net effect:
Burden reduction associated with clear and updated regulations.

23. 23
TAB B
BUREAU OF CONSULAR AFFAIRS

24. 24
BUREAU OF CONSULAR AFFAIRS
REGULATORY WORK – COST SAVINGS AND
BURDEN REDUCTION
22 CFR Part 41 - Visas
Recent Visa Office (VO) regulatory initiatives were aimed at reducing repetitive and
unnecessary burdens on the public and Department personnel while promoting programs that are
cost-effective and achieve the right balance between facilitating travel for legitimate travelers
and national security. Reforms to reduce Department burdens through effective screening and
fraud prevention programs are central to VO’s regulatory scheme.
Effective implementation of the Government Paperwork Reduction Act, in addition to the
transition of the diversity visa from a paper-based program to an electronic one, led VO to
consider using electronic applications more widely as a cost-effective and security-minded
means of managing millions of applications every year. Recent regulatory initiatives show how
the Department’s use of technology is improving screening while, at the same time, reducing
costs of record storage and retrieval, reducing time of consular officer and local staff spent
reviewing repetitive and incomplete information, increasing safety at embassies and consulates,
and allowing better use of existing personnel, thus reducing the need for increased human and
financial resources.
22 CFR 41.103 - Filing an Application
Earlier, the Department amended 22 CFR 41.103 to permit the electronic submission of the
Online Nonimmigrant Visa Application (DS-160). In August 2010, the Department amended 22
CFR 42.63 to provide for the submission of the Online Application for Immigrant Visa and Alien
Registration (DS-260). These applications are part of the Department’s Consular Electronic
Application Center (CEAC) that provides immigrant and nonimmigrant visa applicants with an
online process to electronically complete and submit applications. The CEAC initiative
streamlines the application process and reduces the amount of paper generated during the
application, satisfying both the Government Paperwork Elimination Act, as well as advancing
the spirit of “green legislation” endorsed by the Administration and making better use of existing
resources.
Cost Savings and Burden Reduction to the Public
Streamlining the application process by converting to an electronic system conserves both time
and resources. Previously, nonimmigrant visa applicants completed paper applications in
addition to separate supplemental nonimmigrant forms for different types of visas. Now, the
electronic applications include all other supplemental nonimmigrant forms, saving applicants’
time and lessening the burden on Department resources to collect repetitive and incomplete data,
submitted on paper applications. Applicants may save their data on their computers to be
updated and resubmitted on future applications.

25. 25
CEAC ensures that an application is complete prior to being accepted, saving field officer and
locally employed staff time by not having to review incomplete applications and collect
repetitive information. This saves Department resources by filtering incomplete information,
and allows officers to more efficiently and closely review visa applications especially those of
marginal applicants. Because CEAC completes basic administrative processing in advance for
applicants, visa windows can avoid an influx of interviewees who are otherwise documentarily
unqualified. Staff and the public are made safer by reduced crowds at overseas embassies and
consulates that are easier for security personnel to screen and monitor. Additionally, given the
time and expense for visa applicants to travel to an interview, requiring them to do so only when
they have completed the application forms and information requirements saves them time and
money.
Electronic applications negate the need for a large storage and shipment program and archiving
of paper applications for many years. Storing applicant information electronically saves the
Department time and money as well as file space. Implementing an electronic system vastly
improved the ability to search, manage, and retrieve the millions of records maintained by the
Department both domestically and overseas, improving the Department’s fraud prevention
efforts and collaboration with law enforcement. These records are also less susceptible to
damage, loss, and misfiling. Electronic storage reduces labor, servicing, and shipping costs
incurred every time a record requires retrieval.
As data collected electronically are often shared with interagency partners for security review of
applicants, regulatory initiatives allow for real-time information sharing, thus improving our
national security screening.
Quantitative Cost Savings and Burden Reduction
Consular Affairs performs an annual examination of costs associated with all consular services.
The activity-based cost model is used to determine costs and those costs are used to set fees. The
model is also used to determine savings achieved. By not incurring expenses associated with a
paper application process, Department studies have shown that the costs of managing the
electronic system have saved the Department approximately $341,300,000 each year since 2008,
primarily in expensive secure storage overseas. 1 These savings will continue into the future.
1
With small exceptions, the Department receives an average of 10 million NIV applications each year. The
processing cost of a paper application was approximately $38. The processing cost of an electronic application is
approximately $3.87. The difference in processing costs for 10 million applications is $341,300,000.

26. 26
BUREAU OF CONSULAR AFFAIRS – LOSS OF NATIONALITY
22 CFR Part 50, Subpart B - Loss of Nationality
In 2008, the Bureau of Consular Affairs revised 22 CFR 50.51, Review of Finding of Loss of
Nationality, to provide a simplified procedure to request a review of previous findings on loss of
nationality. This administrative review process decreases the burden on U.S. citizens and former
U.S. citizens and results in timelier decision-making.
Pursuant to Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (INA), as amended, Section 349 (a), 8
U.S.C. 1481, a U.S. citizen may lose his/her U.S. citizenship by performing one of seven
potentially expatriating acts voluntarily and with the intention of relinquishing U.S. citizenship.
Pursuant to INA Section 358, whenever a U.S. diplomatic or consular officer has reason to
believe that a person abroad has lost his/her U.S. nationality by performing one or more of the
statutory acts of expatriation, the officer must certify the facts upon which the belief is based to
the Department, which will then determine whether to approve a Certificate of Loss of
Nationality with respect to that person. Persons who a diplomatic or consular officer believed
committed a potentially expatriating act, were asked to complete a five-page form, the DS-4079,
Request for Determination of Possible Loss of United States Citizenship, to determine whether
the person committed an expatriating act, and if so, whether he/she did so voluntarily and with
the intention of relinquishing U.S. citizenship (as required by statute).
In 1998, the Department adopted an administrative presumption (based on legal precedent) with
respect to certain potentially expatriating acts. Currently, there are three statutory acts for which
intent to retain U.S. citizenship is presumed: 1) naturalizing in a foreign country; 2) taking a
routine oath of allegiance to a foreign country; or 3) accepting non-policy level employment with
a foreign government. Unless the individual performing any of these acts affirmatively
represents to a consular officer that he/she committed the act with the intention of relinquishing
his/her U.S. citizenship, the Department will presume that the act was performed without such
intent. Most recently, this policy change was extended to service in the armed forces of a foreign
state.
Cost Savings and Burden Reduction to the Public
This eliminated the need for a U.S. diplomatic or consular officer abroad to separately assess
each case in which a U.S. citizen naturalizes in a foreign country and/or takes a routine oath or
accepts a non-policy level position in a foreign government. It also reduces the burden on U.S.
citizens as they are no longer required to submit evidence of intent to retain U.S. nationality or
asked to complete the DS-4079 if they perform any of these acts.
As workloads abroad rise, these changes not only provide better customer services, but also
allowed the Department to more effectively deploy existing personnel.

27. 27
BUREAU OF CONSULAR AFFAIRS – PASSPORT SERVICES
22 CFR Part 51, Subpart B - Passports
In the last five years, the Department has promoted convenience, U.S. job creation, and security
through various initiatives. Our efforts include streamlined procedures while promoting security
of the passports, enhanced cooperative efforts, interagency cooperation, greater use of
technology, and better customer service. For example, in 2007, the Department introduced the
innovative passport card. The passport card is a wallet-size travel document that provides a less
expensive, secure and convenient alternative to the passport book for those who travel frequently
in North America by land or by sea.
Over the last few years, the Department opened eleven agencies and centers, most in major
metropolitan areas, to facilitate the ability of U.S. citizens to apply for passport services, reduce
the time needed to issue passports, promote job growth, and meet the increasing demands for
passports. The Department received ARRA funds to support the passport facility costs, however,
no additional funds were requested to hire additional staff or to pay for related system costs. The
Department reprioritized resource needs in order to meet the demand in the new facilities and
piloted new technology in order to support Department goals without requesting additional
resources. To further these efforts, the Department has also expanded its network of designated
Acceptance Facilities to over 9,000. These facilities are located throughout the United States for
an applicant’s convenience and employ thousands of agents (employees of other agencies and
the courts) who are authorized to accept and pre-process applications.
Passport integrity and national security concerns require additional documentation with
applications as well as more detailed analysis and review of the applications. Yet the estimated
burden time for applicants over the past five years has remained constant. We have vastly
improved our data-sharing capabilities to rapidly verify applicants’ identity and claims to
citizenship. By entering into additional data-sharing agreements with other agencies as well as
the use of commercially available background services, we are better able to focus on detection
of fraudulent claims to citizenship and identity. This permits better adjudication of questionable
cases without additional resources as well as improved customer service to all applicants.
Cost Savings and Burden Reduction to the Public
The opening of passport acceptance and service agencies in eleven cities created 577 new jobs at
the same time improving service delivery and outreach.

28. 28
RETROSPECTIVE REVIEW SCHEDULE
VISA SERVICES
LEGISLATION AND REGULATIONS (CA/VO/L/R)
22 CFR 40-42
As noted in the body of the Plan, the Department recognizes that simplifying and streamlining
visa processing requirements, while remaining consistent with Federal law and the Department’s
national security role, would have the effect of encouraging individuals overseas to apply for
visas and travel to the United States; such legitimate travel could promote tourism, growth and
job creation.
CA/VO/L/R is responsible for Parts 40, 41, and 42 of volume 22 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR). These three parts are comprised of 125 regulations. The division’s review
of these regulations will proceed in chronological order throughout the three parts. The
scheduled process provides for review of a minimum of one-fourth of the regulations each
quarter as some sections will require fewer revisions than others. The division’s review will
consider a variety of factors regarding each regulation’s necessity, complexity, accuracy, and
involvement of the public in the rule’s promulgation.
Below is the schedule by which the division plans to review the following specific regulations,
arranged according to the quarter in which they will be reviewed. As the retrospective review
plan is finalized, the division will assign specific dates to this schedule.
Quarter One
22 CFR 40.1- Definitions
40.2 Documentation of nationals
40.3 Entry into areas under U.S. administration
40.4 Furnishing records and information from files for court proceedings
40.5 Limitations on the use of NCIC criminal history information
40.6 Basis for refusal
40.9 Classes of inadmissible aliens
40.11Medical grounds of ineligibility
40.21 Crimes involving moral turpitude and controlled substance violators
40.22 Multiple criminal convictions
40.24 Prostitution and commercialized vice
40.31 Immigrant membership in totalitarian party
40.41 Public charge
40.51 Labor certification
40.52 Unqualified physicians
40.53 Uncertified foreign health-care workers
40.61 Aliens present without admission or parole
40.62 Failure to attend removal proceedings
40.63 Misrepresentation; falsely claiming citizenship
40.64 Stowaways
40.65 Smugglers
40.66 Subject of civil penalty

29. 29
40.67 Student visa abusers
40.68 Aliens subject to INA 222(g)
40.71 Documentation requirements for immigrants
40.72 Documentation requirements for non-immigrants
40.81 Ineligible for citizenship
40.82 Alien who departed the U.S. to avoid service in the Armed Forces
40.91 Certain aliens previously removed
40.92 Aliens unlawfully present
40.93 Aliens unlawfully present after previous immigration violation
Quarter Two
22 CFR 40.101 Practicing polygamists
40.102 Guardian required to accompany excluded alien
40.103 International child abduction
40.103 Unlawful voters
40.105 Former citizens who renounced citizenship to avoid taxation
40.201 Failure of application to comply with INA
40.202 Certain former exchange visitors
40.203 Alien entitled to A, E, or G non-immigrant classification
40.205 Applicant for immigrant visa under INA 203(c)
22 CFR 41.0 Definitions
41.1 Exemption by law or treaty from passport and visa requirements
41.2 Exemption or waiver by Secretary of State and Secretary of Homeland Security
of passport and/or visa requirements for certain categories of non-immigrants
41.3 Waiver by joint action of consular and immigration officers of passport and/or
visa requirements.
41.11 Entitlement to nonimmigrant status
41.12 Classification symbols
41.21 Foreign Officials—General
41.22 Officials of foreign governments
41.23 Accredited officials in transit
41.24 International organization aliens
41.25 NATO representatives, officials, and employees
41.26 Diplomatic visas
41.27 Official visas
41.31 Temporary visitors for business or pleasure
41.32 Nonresident alien Mexican border crossing identification cards; combined
border crossing identification cards and B-1/B-2 visitor visa
41.33 Nonresident alien Canadian border crossing identification card (BCC)
41.41 Crewmen
41.51 Treaty trader, treaty investor, or treaty alien in a specialty occupation
41.52 Information media representative
Quarter Three
22 CFR 41.53 Temporary workers and trainees

30. 30
41.54 Intracompany transferees (executives, managers, and specialists)
41.55 Aliens with extraordinary ability
41.56 Athletes, artists and entertainers
41.57 International cultural exchange visitors and visitors under the Irish Peace
Process Cultural Training Program Act (IPPCTPA)
41.58 Aliens in religious occupations
41.59 Professionals under the North American Free Trade Agreement
41.61 Student—academic and nonacademic
41.62 Exchange visitors
41.63 Two-year home-country physical presence requirement
41.71 Transit aliens
41.81 Fiancé or spouse of a U.S. citizen and derivative children
41.83 Certain witnesses and informants
41.84 Victims of trafficking in persons
41.86 Certain spouses and children of lawful permanent resident status
41.101 Place of application
41.102 Personal appearance of applicant
41.103 Filing an application
41.104 Passport requirements
41.105 Supporting documents and fingerprinting
41.106 Processing
41.107 Visa fees
41.108 Medical examination
41.111 Authority to issue visa
41.112 Validity of visa
41.113 Procedures in issuing visas
41.121 Refusal of individual visas
41.122 Revocation of visas
22 CFR 42.1 Aliens not required to obtain immigrant visas
42.2 Aliens not required to present passports
Quarter Four
22 CFR 42.11 Classification symbols
42.12 Rules of chargeability
42.21 Immediate relatives
42.22 Returning resident aliens
42.23 Certain former U.S. citizens
42.24 Adoption under the Hague Convention on Protection of Children and Co-
operation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption and the Intercountry Adoption Act of
2000
42.31 Family-sponsored immigrants
42.32 Employment-based preference immigrants
42.33 Diversity immigrants
42.41 Effect of approved petition
42.42 Petitions for immediate relative or preference status
42.43 Suspension or termination of action in petition cases

31. 31
42.51 Department control of numerical limitations
42.52 Post records of visa applications
42.53 Priority date of individual applicants
42.54 Order of consideration
42.55 Reports on numbers and priority dates of applications on record
42.61 Place of application
42.62 Personal appearance and interview of applicant
42.63 Application forms and other documentation
42.64 Passport requirements
42.65 Supporting documents
42.66 Medical examination
42.67 Execution of application, registration, and fingerprinting
42.68 Informal evaluation of family members if principal applicant precedes them
42.71 Authority to issue visa; visa fees
42.72 Validity of visas
42.73 Procedure in issuing visas
42.74 Issuance of new or replacement visas
42.81 Procedure in refusing individual visas
42.82 Revocation of visas
42.83 Termination of Registration

32. 32
RETROSPECTIVE REVIEW SCHEDULE
PASSPORT SERVICES (CA/PPT)
22 CFR PART 51
Passport Services’ main regulation is Part 51 of Title 22 of the Code of Federal Regulations –
Passports. PPT also shares responsibility for review of 7 FAM 1300. It is PPT’s practice to
conduct regular reviews of both the regulation and the Foreign Affairs Manual (FAM). In fact,
PPT is currently working with the Office of the Legal Adviser (L/CA) to revise and add to 22
CFR Subparts E and F. Subpart D is also currently being revised. In addition, each year in May
PPT and Overseas Citizen Services (OCS) conduct a review of 7 FAM 1300 and make the
necessary revisions. PPT will continue to work with OCS to annually review and revise 7 FAM
1300. However, specifically to implement Executive Order 13563, PPT proposes routine
quarterly reviews of 22 CFR Part 51.
PPT is also responsible for 22 CFR Part 53, Passport Requirement and Exceptions, which were
revised most recently in coordination with U.S. Department of Homeland Security regarding the
Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative.
At the beginning of each quarter, various divisions within PPT will meet to discuss how and
which offices will conduct the review of 22 CFR Part 51. During the quarter, assigned subparts
of 22 CFR Part 51 will be reviewed to ensure consistency with the requirements of Executive
Order 13563. The review will be completed by the end of the quarter, and the suggested changes
and updates will be submitted to PPT/L (Legal Affairs and Law Enforcement Liaison) by the last
day of the quarter. During the next quarter, PPT/L will review and, as needed, begin the process
for implementing the changes resulting from the previous quarter.
PPT (including, but not
limited to, PPT/A, PPT/L,
PPT/PMO, PPT/IIC &
Quarter 1 – January 1 PPT/SPCA) reviews & revises
22 CFR Part 51 Subparts
A&B
Due Date: March 31
PPT (including, but not PPT/L Reviews & implements
limited to, PPT/A, PPT/L, changes from Q1 review
PPT/PMO & PPT/SPCA)
Quarter 2 – April 1 reviews & revises 22 CFR
Part 51 Subparts C&D
Due Date: June 30

33. 33
PPT (including, but not PPT/L Reviews & implements
limited to, PPT/A & PPT/L,) changes from Q2 review
Quarter 3 – July 1 reviews & revises 22 CFR
Part 51 Subparts E&F
Due Date: September 30
PPT (including, but not PPT/L Reviews & implements
limited to, PPT/A, PPT/L, changes from Q3 review
PPT/PMO, PPT/IIC &
Quarter 4 – October 1 PPT/SPCA) reviews 22 CFR
Part 53 and all of 22 CFR Part
51 for consistency
Due Date: December 31
PPT (including, but not PPT/L Reviews & implements
limited to, PPT/A, PPT/L, changes from Q4 review
PPT/PMO, PPT/IIC &
Quarter 1 – January 1 PPT/SPCA) reviews & revises
22 CFR Part 51 Subparts
A&B
Due Date: March 31
22 CFR 51 Passports
51.1 Definitions
Subpart A – General
51.2 Passport issued to nationals only
51.3 Types of passports
51.4 Validity of passports
51.5 Adjudication and issuance of passports
51.6 Verification of passports and release of information
from passport records
51.7 Passport property of U.S. government
51.8 Submission of currently valid passport
51.9 Amendment of passports
51.10 Replacement passports
Subpart B – Application
51.20 General
51.21 Execution of passport application

34. 34
51.22 Passport agents and passport acceptance agents
51.23 Identity of applicant
51.24 Affidavit of identifying witness
51.25 Name of applicant to be used in passport
51.26 Photographs
51.27 Incompetents
51.28 Minors
Subpart C – Evidence of U.S. Citizenship or Nationality
51.40 Burden of Proof
51.41 Documentary Evidence
51.42 Persons born in the United States applying for
a passport for the first time.
51.43 Persons born outside the United States applying for a
passport for the first time
51.44 Proof of resumption or retention of U.S. citizenship
51.45 Department discretion to require evidence of U.S.
citizenship or non-citizen nationality.
51.46 Return or retention of evidence of U.S. citizenship or
non-citizen nationality.
Subpart D – Fees
51.50 Form of Payment
51.51 Passport Fees
51.52 Exemption from Payment of Passport Fees
51.53 Refunds
51.54 Replacement Passports without Payment of
Applicable Fee
51.55 Execution Fee Not Refundable
51.56 Expedited Passport Processing
Subpart E – Denial, Revocation and Restriction of Passports
51.60 Denial and Restriction of Passports
51.61 Denial of Passports to Certain Convicted Drug
Traffickers
51.62 Revocation or limitation of passports
51.63 Passports invalid for travel into or through restricted
areas; prohibition on passports valid only for travel to Israel.
51.64 Special Validation of Passports for Travel to Restricted
areas
51.65 Notification of Denial or Revocation of Passport
51.66 Surrender of Passport
Subpart F – Procedures for Review of Certain Denials and Revocations
51.71 Request for Hearing to Review Certain Denials and
Revocations

35. 35
51.72 The Hearing
51.73 Transcript and Record of the Hearing
51.73 Privacy of Hearing
51.74 Final Decision
22 CFR 53 – Passport Requirement and Exceptions
53.1 Passport Requirement; definitions
53.2 Exceptions
53.3 Attempt of a Citizen to Enter Without a Valid Passport
53.4 Optional Use of a Valid Passport

36. 36
RETROSPECTIVE REVIEW SCHEDULE
OVERSEAS CITIZEN SERVICES
POLICY REVIEW AND INTERAGENCY LIAISON (CA/OCS/PRI)
CA/OCS/PRI is responsible for Parts 50, 51 (CA/PPT/L primary duty), 52, 53 (CA/PPT/L
primary duty), 71, 72, 92, 93, 94, 96, 97, 98, 99, 102, and 193 of volume 22 of the Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR). CA/OCS/PRI’s review of these regulations will proceed in
chronological order throughout the three parts. The scheduled process will review a minimum of
one-fourth of the regulations each quarter as some sections will require fewer revisions than
others. The office’s review will consider a variety of factors regarding each regulation’s
necessity, complexity, accuracy, and involvement of the public in the rule’s promulgation.
Below is the schedule by which CA/OCS/PRI plans to review the following specific regulations,
arranged according to the quarter in which they will be reviewed. As the retrospective review
plan is finalized, the office will assign specific dates to this schedule.
22 CFR Part Drafting Participants
22 CFR Part 50 (Nationality) CA/OCS/PRI; CA/PPT/L;
L/CA; USCIS
22 CFR Part 51 (Passports) CA/PPT/L Lead;
CA/OCS/PRI coordinating
with CA/PPT/L; L/CA
22 CFR Part 53 (Passport CA/PPT/L Lead;
Requirement and CA/OCS/PRI coordinating
Exceptions) with CA/PPT/L; L/CA
Quarter 1 – January 1
22 CFR Part 71 (Consular CA/OCS/PRI;
Protection, Loans) CA/OCS/ACS; L/M;
L/CA; L/EMP; RM; HHS
22 CFR Part 72 (Deaths and CA/OCS/PRI;
Estates) CA/OCS/ACS; L/CA
22 CFR 52 (Marriage) CA/OCS/PRI; L/CA
Due Date: March 31
22 CFR Part 92 (Notarials, CA/OCS/PRI; L/CA; DOJ
Authentication, Judicial)
Quarter 2 – April 1 22 CFR Part 93 (Service on CA/OCS/PRI; L/DL; L/CA;
a Foreign State) DOJ
Due Date: June 30
22 CFR Parts 96, 97, 98, 99 CA/OCS/PRI; CA/OCS/CI;
Quarter 3 – October 1
(Inter-Country Adoption) USCIS; L/CA

37. 37
22 CFR Part 94 (Child CA/OCS/PRI; CA/OCS/CI;
Abduction) DOJ; L/CA
Due Date: December 31
22 CFR Part 193 (Hostage CA/OCS/PRI; S/CT; L/CA
Benefits)
22 CFR Part 102 (Civil CA/OC/PRI;
Aviation) CA/OCS/ACS;
Quarter 4 – January1
CA/OCS/Crisis Mgt; S-ES-
O-CMS; EBB; NTSB;
L/CA; L/EB
Due Date: March 31
22 CFR 50 - Nationality
Subpart A--PROCEDURES FOR DETERMINATION OF UNITED STATES NATIONALITY
OF A PERSON ABROAD
50.1 Definitions
50.2 Determination of U.S. Nationality of Persons Abroad
50.3 Application for Registration
50.4 Application for Passport
50.5 Application for Registration of Birth Abroad
50.6 Registration at the Department of Birth Abroad
50.7 Consular Report of Birth Abroad of a Citizen of the United States of America
50.8 Certification of Report of Birth Abroad of a United States Citizen
50.9 Card of identity
50.10 Certificate of nationality
50.11 Certificate of identity for travel to the United States to apply for admission
Subpart B--RETENTION AND RESUMPTION OF NATIONALITY
50.20 Retention of nationality
50.30 Resumption of nationality
Subpart C--LOSS OF NATIONALITY
50.40 Certification of loss of U.S. nationality
50.50 Renunciation of nationality
50.51 Review of finding of loss of nationality
22 CFR 51- Passports – CA/PPT/L has primary responsibility for this regulation, but
CA/OCS/PRI works closely with CA/PPT/L because the regulation has overseas applicability.

38. 38
51.1 Definitions
Subpart A – General
51.2 Passport issued to nationals only
51.3 Types of passports
51.4 Validity of passports
51.5 Adjudication and issuance of passports
51.6 Verification of passports and release of information
from passport records
51.7 Passport property of U.S. government
51.8 Submission of currently valid passport
51.9 Amendment of passports
51.10 Replacement passports
Subpart B – Application
51.20 General
51.21 Execution of passport application
51.22 Passport agents and passport acceptance agents
51.23 Identity of applicant
51.24 Affidavit of identifying witness
51.25 Name of applicant to be used in passport
51.26 Photographs
51.27 Incompetents
51.28 Minors
Subpart C – Evidence of U.S. Citizenship or Nationality
51.40 Burden of Proof
51.41 Documentary Evidence
51.42 Persons born in the United States applying for
a passport for the first time
51.43 Persons born outside the United States applying for a
passport for the first time
51.44 Proof of resumption or retention of U.S. citizenship
51.45 Department discretion to require evidence of U.S.
citizenship or non-citizen nationality
51.46 Return or retention of evidence of U.S. citizenship or
non-citizen nationality
Subpart D – Fees
51.50 Form of Payment
51.51 Passport Fees
51.52 Exemption from Payment of Passport Fees
51.53 Refunds
51.54 Replacement Passports without Payment of

39. 39
Applicable Fee
51.55 Execution Fee Not Refundable
51.56 Expedited Passport Processing
Subpart E – Denial, Revocation and Restriction of Passports
51.60 Denial and Restriction of Passports
51.61 Denial of Passports to Certain Convicted Drug
Traffickers
51.62 Revocation or limitation of passports
51.63 Passports invalid for travel into or through restricted
areas; prohibition on passports valid only for travel to Israel.
51.64 Special Validation of Passports for Travel to Restricted
areas
51.65 Notification of Denial or Revocation of Passport
51.66 Surrender of Passport
Subpart F – Procedures for Review of Certain Denials and Revocations
51.71 Request for Hearing to Review Certain Denials and
Revocations
51.72 The Hearing
51.73 Transcript and Record of the Hearing
51.73 Privacy of Hearing
51.74 Final Decision
22 CFR 52 - Marriages
52.1 Celebration of Marriages
52.2 Authentication of Marriage and Divorce Documents
52.3 Certification as to Marriage Laws
22 CFR 53 - Passport Requirement and Exceptions - CA/PPT/L has primary responsibility for
this regulation, but CA/OCS/PRI works closely with CA/PPT/L because the regulation has
overseas applicability.
53.1 Passport Requirement; definitions
53.2 Exceptions
53.3 Attempt of a Citizen to Enter Without a Valid Passport
53.4 Optional Use of a Valid Passport
SUBCHAPTER H--PROTECTION AND WELFARE OF AMERICANS, THEIR
PROPERTY AND ESTATES
22 CFR 71 - PROTECTION AND WELFARE OF CITIZENS AND THEIR PROPERTY
Subpart A-- General Activities
71.1 Protection of Americans Abroad
71.2 Requests for Naval Force in Foreign Port

40. 40
71.3 American Claimants to Foreign Estates and Inheritances
71.4 Real Property of Deceased American Citizens
71.5 Storage or Safekeeping of Private Property
71.6 Services for Distressed Americans
71.7 Reports on Catastrophes Abroad
71.8 Assistance to American Red Cross
71.9 Presentation of Americans at Foreign Courts
Subpart B -- Emergency Medical and Dietary Assistance for U.S. Nationals
Incarcerated Abroad
71.10 Emergency Medical Assistance
71.11 Short-term Full Diet Program
71.12 Dietary Supplements
22 CFR 72 - Deaths and Estates
SUBCHAPTER H--PROTECTION AND WELFARE OF AMERICANS, THEIR
PROPERTY AND ESTATES
PART 72--DEATHS AND ESTATES
§72.1 Definitions.
§72.2 Consular responsibility.
§72.3 Exceptions.
§72.4 Notifications of death.
§72.5 Final report of death.
§72.6 Report of presumptive death.
§72.7 Consular responsibility.
§72.8 Regulatory responsibility of consular officer.
§72.9 Responsibility if legal representative is present.
Responsibility if a will intended to operate locally
§72.10
exists.
§72.11 Responsibility if a will intended to operate in the

41. 41
United States exists.
§72.12 Bank deposits in foreign countries.
§72.13 Effects to be taken into physical possession.
Nominal possession; property not normally taken into
§72.14
physical possession.
§72.15 Action when possession is impractical.
§72.16 Procedure for inventorying and appraising effects.
§72.17 Final statement of account.
§72.18 Payment of debts owed by decedent.
Consular officer is ordinarily not to act as
§72.19
administrator of estate.
Prohibition against performing legal services or
§72.20
employing counsel.
Consular officer may not assume financial
§72.21
responsibility for the estate.
§72.22 Release of personal estate to legal representative.
§72.23 Affidavit of next of kin.
§72.24 Conflicting claims.
§72.25 Transfer of personal estate to Department of State.
§72.26 Vesting of personal estate in United States.
Export of cultural property; handling other property
§72.27
when export, possession, or import may be illegal.
§72.28 Claims for lost, stolen, or destroyed personal estate.
Real property overseas belonging to deceased United
§72.29
States citizen or national.

42. 42
Provisions in a will or advanced directive regarding
§72.30
disposition of remains.
§72.31 Fees for consular death and estates services.
PART 92--NOTARIAL AND RELATED SERVICES
§92.1 Definitions.
Description of overseas notarial functions of the
§92.2
Department of State, record of acts.
§92.3 Consular districts.
Authority of notarizing officers of the Department of
§92.4
State under Federal law.
Acceptability of notarial acts under State or territorial
§92.5
law.
Authority of notarizing officers under international
§92.6
practice.
Responsibility of notarizing officers of the
§92.7
Department of State.
§92.8 Compliance with request for notarial services.
§92.9 Refusals of requests for notarial services.
§92.10 Specific waiver in notarial certificate.
§92.11 Preparation of legal documents.
§92.12 Necessity for certification of notarial acts.
§92.13 Form of notarial certificate.
§92.14 Venue on notarial certificates.
§92.15 Signing notarial certificate.
§92.16 Sealing the notarial certificate.

43. 43
§92.17 Fastening of pages.
§92.18 Oaths and affirmations defined.
§92.19 Administering an oath.
§92.20 Administering an affirmation.
§92.21 Notarial certificate to oath or affirmation.
§92.22 ''Affidavit'' defined.
§92.23 Taking an affidavit.
§92.24 Usual form of affidavit.
§92.25 Title of affidavit.
§92.26 Venue on affidavit.
§92.27 Affiant's allegations in affidavit.
§92.28 Signature of affiant on affidavit.
§92.29 Oath or affirmation to affidavit.
§92.30 Acknowledgment defined.
§92.31 Taking an acknowledgment.
§92.32 Notarial certificate to acknowledgment.
§92.33 Execution of certificate of acknowledgment.
§92.34 Fastening certificate to instrument.
§92.35 Errors in certificate of acknowledgment.
§92.36 Authentication defined.
§92.37 Authentication procedure.
§92.38 Forms of certificate of authentication.

44. 44
Authenticating foreign public documents (Federal
§92.39
procedures).
§92.40 Authentication of foreign extradition papers.
Limitations to be observed in authenticating
§92.41
documents.
Certification of copies of foreign records relating to
§92.42
land titles.
§92.43 Fees for notarial services and authentications.
§92.49 ''Deposition'' defined.
§92.50 Use of depositions in court actions.
§92.51 Methods of taking depositions in foreign countries.
§92.52 ''Deposition on notice'' defined.
§92.53 ''Commission to take depositions'' defined.
§92.54 ''Letters rogatory'' defined.
Consular authority and responsibility for taking
§92.55
depositions.
§92.56 Summary of procedure for taking depositions.
§92.57 Oral examination of witnesses.
§92.58 Examination on basis of written interrogatories.
§92.59 Recording of objections.
§92.60 Examination procedures.
§92.61 Transcription and signing of record of examination.
§92.62 Captioning and certifying depositions.
§92.63 Arrangement of papers.

45. 45
§92.64 Filing depositions.
Depositions to prove genuineness of foreign
§92.65
documents.
Depositions taken before foreign officials or other
§92.66
persons in a foreign country.
Taking of depositions in United States pursuant to
§92.67
foreign letters rogatory.
Foreign Service fees and incidental costs in the taking
§92.68
of evidence.
Charges payable to foreign officials, witnesses,
§92.69
foreign counsel, and interpreters.
Special fees for depositions in connection with
§92.70
foreign documents.
Fees for letters rogatory executed by officials in the
§92.71
United States.
Services in connection with patents and patent
§92.72
applications.
§92.73 Services in connection with trademark registrations.
Services in connection with United States securities
§92.74
or interests therein.
§92.75 Services in connection with income tax returns.
§92.76 Copying documents.
§92.77 Recording documents.
§92.78 Translating documents.
§92.79 Procuring copies of foreign public documents.
§92.80 Obtaining American vital statistics records.
§92.81 Performance of legal services.

46. 46
§92.82 Recommending attorneys or notaries.
§92.84 Legal process defined.
§92.85 Service of legal process usually prohibited.
§92.86 Consular responsibility for serving subpoenas.
Consular responsibility for serving orders to show
§92.87
cause.
§92.88 Consular procedure.
§92.89 Fees for service of legal process.
Delivering documents pertaining to the revocation of
§92.90
naturalization.
Service of documents at request of Congressional
§92.91
committees.
§92.92 Service of legal process under provisions of State law.
Notarial services or authentications connected with
§92.93
service of process by other persons.
Replying to inquiries regarding service of process or
§92.94
other documents.
§92.95 Transportation of witnesses to the United States.
PART 93--SERVICE ON FOREIGN STATE
§93.1 Service through the diplomatic channel.
§93.2 Notice of suit (or of default judgment).
PART 94--INTERNATIONAL CHILD ABDUCTION
§94.1 Definitions.
§94.2 Designation of Central Authority.

47. 47
§94.3 Functions of the Central Authority.
§94.4 Prohibitions.
§94.5 Application.
§94.6 Procedures for children abducted to the United States.
Procedures for children abducted from the United
§94.7
States.
§94.8 Interagency coordinating group.
PART 96--ACCREDITATION OF AGENCIES AND APPROVAL OF PERSONS UNDER
THE INTERCOUNTRY ADOPTION ACT OF 2000 (IAA)
Subpart A--GENERAL PROVISIONS
§96.1 Purpose.
§96.2 Definitions.
§96.3 [Reserved]
Subpart B--SELECTION, DESIGNATION, AND DUTIES OF ACCREDITING ENTITIES
§96.4 Designation of accrediting entities by the Secretary.
Requirement that accrediting entity be a nonprofit or
§96.5
public entity.
Performance criteria for designation as an accrediting
§96.6
entity.
Authorities and responsibilities of an accrediting
§96.7
entity.
§96.8 Fees charged by accrediting entities.
Agreement between the Secretary and the accrediting
§96.9
entity.